The Supreme Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cen. Excise

The Supreme Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 12, 2003

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/31206

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/31206
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: J Balasundaram, S T C.
Decided On: Jun 12, 2003
Subject: Right to Information

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Right to Information

Key legal issue: Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The Supreme Industries Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of Cen. Excise

Excerpt

.....appeals themselves with the consent of both sides, after waiving the pre-deposit of duty of rs. 6,33,214.62 and penalty of rs. 41,550/-. the details of the duty and penalty amounts are annexed to this order.2. the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plastic moulded industrial components and in their manufacture of it, they received moulds free of cost from their customers. the appellants included the amortised mould cost into the value for the purpose of arriving at the assessable value of the goods manufactured by them in the light of cbec circular f.no. 170/4/96-cx dated 23.1.96. show cause notices were issued proposing to load the proportional mould cost and directing the appellants to produce cost accountant's certificate to that effect.order-in-original were passed confirming the demands covered under 8 different show cause notices and penalties were also imposed on the ground that the cost of moulds were not included in the assessable value of the plastic moulded components manufactured and cleared by the appellants to their customers. the commissioner (appeals), relying upon the board's circular dated 23.1.96 held that it was incumbent upon the appellants to produce the cost certificate certified by cost accountant for the purpose of determination of the assessable value and did not accept only the chartered accountant certificate. in the absence of cost accountant certificate as required under the board's circular cited supra, he dismissed the appeals for non compliance with the board's circular. hence these appeals before the tribunal.3. on hearing both sides and noting the submissions of the appellants that they are prepared to produce before the adjudicating authority the cost accountant's certificate as required and which they were not directed to produce before the dismissal of the appeals by the commissioner (appeals), we hold that it is fit case for the matter to go back to the original authority before whom the appellants shall produce.....

Full Judgment

Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J) 1. For reasons recorded below, we proceed to hear and decide the appeals themselves with the consent of both sides, after waiving the pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 6,33,214.62 and penalty of Rs. 41,550/-. The details of the duty and penalty amounts are annexed to this order.

2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plastic moulded industrial components and in their manufacture of it, they received moulds free of cost from their customers. The appellants included the amortised mould cost into the value for the purpose of arriving at the assessable value of the goods manufactured by them in the light of CBEC circular F.No. 170/4/96-CX dated 23.1.96. Show cause notices were issued proposing to load the proportional mould cost and directing the appellants to produce Cost Accountant's certificate to that effect.

Order-in-original were passed confirming the demands covered under 8 different show cause notices and penalties were also imposed on the ground that the cost of moulds were not included in the assessable value of the plastic moulded components manufactured and cleared by the appellants to their customers. The Commissioner (Appeals), relying upon the Board's circular dated 23.1.96 held that it was incumbent upon the appellants to produce the Cost certificate certified by Cost Accountant for the purpose of determination of the assessable value and did not accept only the Chartered Accountant certificate. In the absence of Cost Accountant certificate as required under the Board's Circular cited supra, he dismissed the appeals for non compliance with the Board's circular. Hence these appeals before the Tribunal.

3. On hearing both sides and noting the submissions of the appellants that they are prepared to produce before the Adjudicating authority the Cost Accountant's certificate as required and which they were not directed to produce before the dismissal of the appeals by the Commissioner (Appeals), we hold that it is fit case for the matter to go back to the Original authority before whom the appellants shall produce the Cost Accountant's certificate as required in terms of Board's circular dated 23.1.96. The jurisdictional Asstt.

Commissioner/Dy. Commissioner shall extend a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants before passing fresh orders in the light of the Cost Accountant certificate to be produced before him by the appellants.

4. The appeals are thus allowed by remand as above.

(Dictated in Court) M/S-THE SUPREME INDUSTRIES LTD. Stay Application 03.11.96 (P/23) 04.03.97 (P/38) 27.06.97 CP/30) 31.12.97 (P/45) 3Q.06.S8 P/52) 03.03.SS CP/2S) 15.C6.SS CP/22) 06.02.02 (P/20)

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties The Supreme Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner of Cen. Excise Same Subject Right to Information Same Judge J Balasundaram, S T C.